Slashdot Mirror


Valve Reveals Steam's 2016 Top Earners -- Including 'No Man's Sky' (pcgamer.com)

An anonymous reader quotes PC Gamer: In a surprise announcement today to kick off 2017, Valve has revealed the 100 best-selling Steam games of 2016... Although the "Top Sellers" section of Steam gives a constant sense of what's selling now, Valve hasn't previously compiled an annual list of which Steam games earned the most money... Rather than ranked in order from 1-100, the list is separated into tiers, from Platinum to Bronze, based on revenue (as opposed to copies sold)... Doom didn't crack the top 12, but it may have gotten close: it's ranked somewhere between 13th and 24th
That second-place Gold tier included more modern throwbacks to classic games, including Team Fortress 2, Call of Duty: Black Ops III, and Rise of the Tomb Raider: 20-Year Celebration. Meanwhile, No Man's Sky, which got off to a rocky start this summer before its massive November update, still turned up in the top "Platinum" tier for revenue earned in 2016. (And it's now discounted 40%.)

In fact, "As an extension of the Winter Sale, all but six of these games are on sale," reports PC Gamer. The other top-earning Steam games were Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, Grand Theft Auto V, Civilization VI, and DOTA 2 (which is free to play), as well as Rocket League, XCOM 2, Dark Souls III, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Fallout 4, Total War: Warhammer, and Tom Clancy's The Division.

99 comments

  1. Which is free to play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently not.

    1. Re:Which is free to play by Tukz · · Score: 2

      If you are referring to DOTA 2, it's completely free and there is no "pay 2 win".

      Purchases are entirely cosmetics.

      And people are spending a stupid amount of money on cosmetics, just look at CS:GO.

      --
      - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
  2. Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by godrik · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Interestingly, about half of the game in that top 100 list are available for Linux. That is about the same number available for Mac. Obviously they are all available for windows.

    I have been casually playing on Debian using steam. And I do find enough game to keep me entertained. I am not sure whether Unity, steam OS, or the need to port games to mobile systems contributed to the increase in gaming support for Linux. But Linux definitely seems to have reasonable gaming options.

    Opinions ?

    1. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by ezelkow1 · · Score: 1

      Im going with steamOS being the pusher, and valve's clout behind it. Anything on steam that runs on linux is marked as SteamOS+Linux supported and valve probably tried to push as many devs as possible to do steamOS releases

      SteamOS is fairly nifty. I had been using a link I bought during the last sale basically as a media streamer from my desktop, but having done a gaming build this summer I decided to throw my old gaming box in an htpc case and throw steamOS on there. It is a nice cross between having desktop capability with an immediately usable frontend. Having your entire library available (either as a linux install, and where linux isnt or you dont want to do a local install you are still free to stream from a networked desktop) along with being able to have a native kodi install, plus retroarch, makes it a fairly complete HTPC setup sans things like netflix

    2. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's meaningless to me, I have a windows system just for gaming. It's just like having a separate console, I don't care what it's running so I use what runs almost everything. I have a BSD system for my personal stuff, in fact the way Linux is now(the people involved) I probably trust it less than windows at this point.
      Next year will be the year of the abacus desktop because people who write software are mutton heads.

    3. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was never a problem with Linux as a gaming OS. Games just didn't support it.

    4. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd say the most significant factor is that Unity and Unreal engines are multi-platform. Steam's native support certainly contributed, of course, but it's very difficult for a game developer to justify spending a lot of engineering effort to support 1% of the market unless you have some significant resources to spend.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    5. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by NotAPK · · Score: 1

      "in fact the way Linux is now(the people involved) I probably trust it less than windows at this point."

      Care to elaborate?

      I don't trust Canonical, and I'm wary (but not zealously opposed to) of systemd. Is there anything else shifty going on that should be discussed?

    6. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's viable. Tho you still need to cherish and praise any AAA devs who put out linux versions of their games. It's still a fan service. The world needs to collapse and rebuilt to get EA, Blizzard or Ubisoft to put out linux games.
      Indie devs consistently support linux.
      Anyways I suggest to switch to Ubuntu as most devs use that to test games.

    7. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Espectr0 · · Score: 1

      almost all of the games run slower than on windows, with some few exceptions. still, it's a lot better than before.

    8. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Carewolf · · Score: 2

      Interestingly, about half of the game in that top 100 list are available for Linux. That is about the same number available for Mac. Obviously they are all available for windows.

      I have been casually playing on Debian using steam. And I do find enough game to keep me entertained. I am not sure whether Unity, steam OS, or the need to port games to mobile systems contributed to the increase in gaming support for Linux. But Linux definitely seems to have reasonable gaming options.

      Opinions ?

      I only do impulse purchases of games that run on Linux. Which in the category of strategy games that I play is basically all of them. It is very viable. The only problems are games demanding high-end graphics. X-COM 2 for instance ran on Linux, but already had a few graphical problems on Windows, and more and worse performance on Linux.

    9. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

      Im going with steamOS being the pusher, and valve's clout behind it.

      I think that the reason is more simple than that. Steam got a client on Linux before SteamOS became a thing. Ever since then, the number of Linux games on Steam has doubled each year. SteamOS got a lot of press (and I am sure that has had some effect), but just offering an easy way to sell and install Linux games made the platform more viable for the smaller developers.

      Add to this the ease to develop for Linux by just selecting another target platform with the game engines (which also now have free versions). Where you would once have to make a carefully considered decision to support the OS, now it is almost a no-brainer. You don't have to be an expert in porting games to Linux. You don't have to deal with the complexity of installing to different flavours of Linux. You don't have to make your own store (or use some lesser known one) to be able to sell to gamers on Linux.

      If SteamOS had been a driving factor in all this, then surely Value would highlight its use on the Steam Survey. Instead, it is an unlisted also-ran in the already tiny proportion of gamers that use Linux. This small number of users is why it has to be so easy for developers to be able to support the OS, as there simply aren't enough gamers on it to make it worth the expense of much more than ticking an extra box on their development system to add support for Linux.

    10. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      I game exclusively on Linux with Steam. Works pretty good for me and I have a blast. The selection isn't as good as Windows but, hey, I can only play one game at a time.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    11. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Kjella · · Score: 2

      I think that for playing alone, I could now be reasonably content with what's on offer now. There are enough games on Windows that I don't get around to playing them all, so basically it'd just narrow the field. But I have friends and we play games like GTA V and Overwatch and I don't want to be left out. Dual booting is extremely annoying. Buying two high end graphics cards is out. So as much as my inner nerd wants to say yes, it's still no. I might put in my previous graphics card and play lighter titles though, it's on the substitute bench while before it was up in the stands selling hot dogs. And Apple - still the second biggest graphics market - had to go off and do their own thing with Metal instead of Vulkan so there'll be no joint force against DirectX. I'm hoping things will change before Win7 goes out of support, but I'm not optimistic.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    12. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mostly just the fact that each year a new distribution pulls ahead and the old ones languish at the bottom of the polls. In Linux to be unpopular is to be unsupported - if you can't get devs rallying to your distro then you have no support.

      In user terms this is exhausting; playing "popular distro of the week" gets tiring rebuilding sda and downloading ISOs constantly. I have Ubuntu but it seems I became unpopular again. Oh well, time for Debian.

      Windows doesn't suffer from this. There's no internal competition in Windows. Windows is Windows.

    13. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      How does DRM/copy protection work on Linux? On Windows it usually requires some dodgy ring-0 driver to be installed, or at least admin level permissions to prevent the game code being ripped. I'm guessing most Linux games don't require the root password just to load up.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many more games work fine under Wine too. Then there are emulated games for DOS, C64, Amiga, most consoles and arcade machines. Linux is a completely viable gaming OS.

    15. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% bullshit. Don't blame your own incompetence on the tool.

    16. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I use KDE neon since it's backed by a community that has been around a very long time and isn't just going to disappear over night.

      The problem with Windows is exactly that Microsoft don't have to worry about improving it. That's how you get steaming piles of spyware and removed user control like Windows 10.

    17. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can use a flat-headed screwdriver to drive a Phillips screw, but you're just being a stupid cunt. Same with using Loonix as a desktop or game console.

      Stop being a cunt.

    18. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and yet it constantly gets improved....

    19. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by kuzb · · Score: 1

      Most gamers aren't willing to cut their nose off to spite their face, which is why Linux remains unpopular for gaming.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    20. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some would disagree with this. Many believe progress has gone backwards.

    21. Re: Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and because titles didn't support it, people didn't use it for games, so it's a catch-22 situation

    22. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      It's called priorities. Everything is a trade off, and gaming for me is just a pastime. It's not a job, e.g., front-end development where it's useful to be up on the latest happenings to maintain employment mobility. I use Linux to get work done, and occasionally I fire up Portal to blow off a little steam. That is precisely the opposite of cutting my nose off despite my face so you can stick your pretentious bullshit up your ass.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    23. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Linux definitely seems to have reasonable gaming options.

      I have been using linux for a while (since Mandrake?), but generally not for gaming. Got stuck with linux laptop this year for about 3 months so I started using it for gaming. About 60% of games I do have on steam have linux version. Learned to use playonlinux for things that do not work. There is also a way to run windows in VM and use PCI bypass to get direct access to GPU at about 5% ish performance cost.

      So absolutely, tons of options. Hell I taught my cousin basics of linux, an elementary school teacher who knows NOTHING about computers. She was running an old Vista install (never updated) and was very happy with Kubuntu. Like, ecstatic. It boots and responds about 5 times faster.

      Of course if you are a gamer, you need certain level of know how to use linux if a game you are looking for is not in the library. As far as Win vs Linux goes, the thing I fear the most is Denuvo which as far as I know can only run inside Windows VM on Linux. Never tried that yet, but with PCI bypass it should be a possible option. As far as I know Wine can't handle Denuvo. Things may have changed tho.

    24. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Kirth · · Score: 1

      Around 24% of all games on Steam are available on Linux. So, yes.

      On a related note, Linux gamers seem to make up somewhere around 1.5%. So maybe Doom would be on Place 12 if it hadn't released Windows only.

      --
      "The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
    25. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a game dev, and the above should be modded up. Without Unity/Unreal support, the ability for even a mid-sized studio to support Linux isn't really financially viable. When it's as easy as changing a target platform and recompiling, it's basically adding a potential audience for free.

    26. Re:Is Linux now a reasonnable gaming OS ? by kuzb · · Score: 1

      Another guy who's a webdev that doesn't want to call himself a webdev. You know what's really easy? Running a virtual machine. Not only can you mirror your production environment to work but the host OS you use ceases to matter.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  3. Re:Keep polishing that turd by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    When someone asks you to polish a turd, what they are really telling you to do is cover it in gold spray paint and glitter.

    Knowing this is important, some people have actually tried to fix impossible messes.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  4. Analysis by mentil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Looking at the list, half of the Platinum earners are RPGs and strategy games, with 3 shooters. Of the Gold earners, 9/12 are shooters. Of the Silver earners, 6/16 are strategy/simulation games. Throughout, many of the highest earners are zombie-themed, open-world, or survival sandbox games. There are 1, 2, 2, and 3 free-to-play games in the Platinum, Gold, Silver, and Bronze categories respectively. Yes, the highest-earning f2p game is Dota2.
    This suggests that niche titles (RPGs, simulation/strategy titles) are some of the best-sellers on PC, as these genres have traditionally been under-served on consoles (think Diablo 1 on PSX compared to Baldur's Gate, rather than a consolified RPG like Witcher 3).

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re: Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We sorta need a better way to describe dota2 than "free to play". Most games with this moniker then allow you to buy power in the game (and for the most part expect it). Dota2 does not suffer from this.

    2. Re: Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free to win?

    3. Re: Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Winners never cheat and cheaters never win (except Putin).

    4. Re:Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the highest earning f2p game that does not have valve's name on it (and so, not earning valve both sales AND commissions) is Warframe. considering that steam is perhaps the least-used platform warframe is available on, that's a pretty huge thing. (warframe is also on ps4 and xbone, and available as a standalone installer, which most pc players use)

    5. Re: Analysis by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      We sorta need a better way to describe dota2 than "free to play". Most games with this moniker then allow you to buy power in the game (and for the most part expect it). Dota2 does not suffer from this.

      True, but I'd rather we accurately label games that are "pay to win" or "pay to play" as something like "Freemium", leaving "free to play" to describe games like Dota2 or Guild Wars 2.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    6. Re: Analysis by Goragoth · · Score: 2

      Personally the way I refer to these sorts of games is "ethical F2P", and that includes titles such as League of Legends and Path of Exile. Anything that you can reasonably play without dropping a cent into. Interestingly these sorts of games tend to do really well (LoL is the biggest earning game, DotA2 is the biggest on Steam, and other games following this model are also doing very well). Turns out that people don't like it when games are obvious cash-grabs.

    7. Re: Analysis by Luthair · · Score: 1

      League is actually pay to win since paying money can have an impact on the outcome of the game. You can unlock things without paying but at any given point you can pay to have an advantage.

    8. Re: Analysis by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You can unlock things without paying but at any given point you can pay to have an advantage.

      If that's not the case, then only the subset of people who want to play dolly with their avatars will spend money on your F2P game. It doesn't become a problem until you can't succeed without paying money, at which point the hordes of players who won't pay for it won't show up, and population drops precipitously. If your game is fun to play even when there's not a lot of players around, this isn't necessarily a problem.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re: Analysis by Cederic · · Score: 1

      If that's not the case, then only the subset of people who want to play dolly with their avatars will spend money on your F2P game.

      Oh no, you may only have one of the 12 highest grossing games of the year. Or three of the top 24.

      Shit, several of the top 12 offer purely cosmetic enhancements.

    10. Re: Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citation needed. I've been playing league for 2 years and there is nothing, I repeat NOTHING you can buy that will help you win. It's all cosmetics or In game boosters for leveling up faster. Once a match has started, a person who has spent $200000 has no advantage over the person who spent $0. It comes down to skills.

  5. No Mans Sky needs refunding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Valve has profit from it they have money to refund. The game's a ripoff and they clearly know it.

    1. Re:No Mans Sky needs refunding by Calydor · · Score: 1

      At first I read your title line to mean that NMS needs a new funding campaign to bring out more content.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:No Mans Sky needs refunding by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Steam refund is a joke.

      They have a policy that they only refund games that have been "played" for less than two hours. If you can't get a game to start, and spend more than 2 hours trying to troubleshoot it, they adamantly refuse to refund anything, even if your actual play time is zero.
      There's no way of escalating or get in touch with a human.

    3. Re:No Mans Sky needs refunding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have a policy that they only refund games that have been "played" for less than two hours. If you can't get a game to start, and spend more than 2 hours trying to troubleshoot it, they adamantly refuse to refund anything, even if your actual play time is zero.
      There's no way of escalating or get in touch with a human.

      It is not a joke because it keeps people from abusing the mostly automated refund process. All you have to do is keep track of the Steam play time. If you are at 1 hour and 50 minutes "play time" and still unable to "get a game to start", then stop right there and refund it because you are unlikely to get it to run given another 2 hours. It is very reasonable.

    4. Re:No Mans Sky needs refunding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are people who aren't willing to spend 10 seconds to make something work and there are people willing to spend most of the day trying to make something work.
      Either way a game is supposed to last a lot longer than 2 hours. If someone purchased a game and got bored of it in 4 hours I think it is pretty fair to offer a refund.
      It's doesn't benefit society to encourage the creation of more low quality games. There are already plenty of those.

    5. Re:No Mans Sky needs refunding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have a policy that they only refund games that have been "played" for less than two hours. If you can't get a game to start, and spend more than 2 hours trying to troubleshoot it, they adamantly refuse to refund anything, even if your actual play time is zero.
      There's no way of escalating or get in touch with a human.

      I had a similar situation to the one you describe, but have come to a different conclusion. I bought Starbound and played it on OS X. However, there's a crashing bug that only shows up near the beginning and makes it impossible to progress. I played for more than 2 hours, ran into the bug, and couldn't find a fix (at the time, there may be one now). I asked for a refund and explained the circumstances in the Details box. Even though I was over the 2 hour mark, they refunded it without issue.

      While I am disappointed about not being able to play the game, my opinion is that the refund–even after the 2-hour limit–was good service.

    6. Re:No Mans Sky needs refunding by arth1 · · Score: 1

      I asked for a refund and explained the circumstances in the Details box. Even though I was over the 2 hour mark, they refunded it without issue.

      My experience is that they don't read the comments box at all. Even if I explained that i had zero play time because i could not get past the installer/launcher, I received a boilerplate reply that it could not be refunded because play time exceeded 2 hours. There seems to be no way to escalate or get in touch with a human. Attempting to resubmit the request with a big PLEASE READ in front of it did not help - same boilerplate reply.

  6. It should be a crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to earn so much money on a game with a community such as CS:GO, and letting the good, friendly players put up with it. There are so many things they could do to clean the community up a bit, but of course it's better to keep the bad eggs since they are also spending money. Fucking criminal.

    1. Re:It should be a crime by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      to earn so much money on a game with a community such as CS:GO, and letting the good, friendly players put up with it. There are so many things they could do to clean the community up a bit, but of course it's better to keep the bad eggs since they are also spending money. Fucking criminal.

      Well considering almost all of the revenue from the game comes from what is essentially a built in slot-machine I don't think the actual FPS play is of much concern to them anymore.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  7. Steam OS seemed to have died off by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    when the Windows Store went *pop*. If that new games for windows thing they pushed with Killer Instinct & Forza had taken off maybe Valve would get the jeebees scared enough to go back to it, but right now it's looking kinda tepid.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Steam OS seemed to have died off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do not count the Windows Store out yet. It is clearly a work in progress and while it is quite shite at the moment it is improving fast. Not only the Store itself but also the technologies and programs around it:
      - Xbox Anywhere and its early birds Forza Horizon 3 and Gears of War 4 are very likely more significant than you realize. Every Xbox One owner who has bought these digitally, can play these on a Windows 10 PC and vice versa. There are a couple issues (FH3's dramerate drops in city) but these are very smooth ports as expected from first party developer.
      - For games, UWP apps and their DX12 implementation have come a long way from the big headlines generating early failures. DX12/DX11 can be properly used, borderless fullscreen works (largely better than regular fullscreen in most games does), Vsync is a choice, FreeSync/GSync work, high refresh rates work just fine, games are started from an executable. UWP does not limit SLI/CF although reports tend to claim that - limitations come from engine implementation or DX12. There are no longer major technical drawbacks to publishing game as UWP via Windows Store.
      - From store point of view - some update made it easier to install on a different drive and make it properly show download size.

      From the semi-technical (as this is mostly UI/UX) and awful side:
      - Windows Store app and web pages are an awful mess. It is genuinely difficult to navigate and buy. Things are hard-to-find, there are regional restrictions that sometimes are displayed on app page, sometimes app is not shown or cannot be found. Installing and updating is not difficult but is not intuitive - currently the place for it seems to be under My Library in Windows Store App.
      - Related to previous - games might not show up under My Library if they are not "supported on the platform" meaning you are missing some vague Windows Update that the game requires. I can understand the technical side although tyig this to OS updates is idiotic but not communicating this to user properly is more so.

      tl;dr
      While I dislike Windows Store on principle and due to awful UI/UX, there are no real technical drawbacks to UWP games at this point. Also, programs like Xbox Anywhere have potential to make a huge difference here.

      CAPTCHA: aggrieve

    2. Re:Steam OS seemed to have died off by Trongy · · Score: 1

      Back in the days of the PowerPC based Macs, Apple maintained an internal x86 build of OS X, not because they had immediate plans to release it as a product, just to be ready to counter competitive threats.

      I see Steam using Linxu/steamOS for the same purpose. Linux game sales on steam account for around 1% of the total, so I doubt anyone is making money from them. However they keep maintaining steamOS and pushing it at their developer days.

      Most Microsoft products were not successful from version 1.0. Microsoft's Windows Store remains a long term threat to Steam and steamOS is a strategic counter.

  8. No Man's Sky by GrBear · · Score: 2

    I find it particularly confusing how a game rated "Mostly Negative" still had the highest sales revenue. At first I thought it was based on sales and didn't include refunds.. but apparently it's based on revenue, which should include refunds.

    At some point I read Steam stopped giving refunds on it, so perhaps there were a large populous that maybe didn't read the reviews before purchasing it.. or actually enjoyed the limited gameplay.

  9. Re:No Man's Sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't refund on the off chance future patches add content. Perhaps I am a closet optimist.

  10. Free to Play games in Gold section by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can the free to play games end up in the top 100 as measured by gross revenue. There must be a whole lot of optional purchases going on.

  11. Re:No Man's Sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of the time, some fraction of your customer base, even though disappointed, for whatever reason never claims his refund. This applies to other products than games as well. There are different reasons, for example people might not consider it worth the bother or time, people might not know they can claim a refund, or they've got other things going on in their lives that are more important so they forget about it. So there is always good money to be made in promising people things that you cannot possibly deliver on.

  12. So defrauding your customers does pay by gweihir · · Score: 1

    And rather handsomely as No Man's Sky shows. Apparently, the only thing they needed to do is make the first 3-4 hours interesting and give people some false hope. Personally, I canceled my pre-order after reading the early reviews.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  13. Re:No Man's Sky by gweihir · · Score: 1

    Indeed. If customers do not punish game-makers for bad quality and broken promises, what do people expect to happen next time?

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  14. Re:No Man's Sky by Lord+Crc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I find it particularly confusing how a game rated "Mostly Negative" still had the highest sales revenue.

    Almost all of it was pre-launch purchases. Game was hyped into the 8th dimension. it was on the "top sellers" list months before launch.

    However, many players spent more than 2 hours playing the game, waiting to find all those neat things they were promised, before they realized the game was not what they had been told it would be. And after 2 hours of game-time you can't refund the game anymore.

    Others are still clinging on hoping the devs will fix the mess and release the game they showed the world during E3 and whatnot.

  15. Not for me but maybe for you. by waspleg · · Score: 1

    30% my collection has Linux ports and that excludes most of the AAA titles, you can check on steamdb.info there is a calculator which shows your account value and other things.

    The Linux filter is dead last in the list and you have to scroll to get to it - rather telling unfortunately.

    It's definitely getting better but not enough to ditch Windows 7. I guess it depends on whether what you want to play/buy is listed there.

    There are also some non-Steam things that work with Wine like I play Hearthstone which runs well under battle.net (Blizzard) on my Mint Thinkpad without issues.

  16. Re:No Man's Sky by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Pre-orders. The game was waaaaay popular for the first day with huge download and player volumes.

    No Man's Sky is currently hovering between the 1000-2000 active player mark. Before the patch to fix many of the issues it was around 300-500 players. Opening weekend was looking more like 200000. People played it, thought it was shit and then either didn't get a refund or weren't granted a refund.

  17. Well they were investigated by waspleg · · Score: 2

    for false advertising in the UK and cleared according to a Forbes article I won't like because even with my extensive ad blocking it was barely legible.

    Here's a /. story about a lot of begrudgingly given refunds

    I read about it before it was released and it looked like another kickstarter-style scam to me and I knew the tears would be copious especially where they billed it as multiplayer but then said your chances of actually encountering someone else would be astronomically low.

    There is a unfulfilled change.org petition and lots of other shit out there about it. I still have 0 interest personally.

    1. Re:Well they were investigated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In their favor, though, they did actually ship a game. When is Star Citizen expected to be released?

    2. Re:Well they were investigated by kuzb · · Score: 1

      Have you looked at the current state of Star Citizen? It still has more content than No Man's Sky.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  18. Interesting how many aren't 2016 games by Solandri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of the 12 games in their platinum category, half (CS:GO, DOTA 2, Witcher 3, Fallout 4, Grand Theft Auto V, and Rocket League) came out before 2016 (though Fallout 4 had a Nov 2015 release so kinda falls into both years).

    Same things with the 12 games in the gold category. Only 4 were released in 2016, 2 in late 2015. And only 5 of the 16 games in the silver category were released in 2016 or late 2015.

    Message to game companies: Good older games with long-term playability make as much money as new games with big advertising budgets which are just a flash in the pan. So don't rush it - take the time to playtest it and do it right.

    1. Re:Interesting how many aren't 2016 games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Message to consumer: We know, but there are lots of different variables in play - that model doesn't work for all studios and all markets due to budgets running dry, talent gain/lost, etc... And on different platforms, with their TCRs, TRCs, and lotcheck there is an entirely different set of demands.

      In short: unless you are in a C-level position from a company who makes games in that list, you may want to check your Dunning-Kruger notions before telling us how we should keep the lights on for the hundreds of people who do this for a living.

      Sincerely,
      Dev from the Platnium level of games

    2. Re:Interesting how many aren't 2016 games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, of the list...

      Platinum: I paid for 1 game (Rocket League). I also downloaded, but have long-since deleted DOTA 2. It struck me as an awkward RTS-control-scheme slapped onto a version of UT2k4's Onslaught game type. When I want to scratch that itch these days, I fire up Planetside 2.

      Gold: I paid for 2 games (TF2 during the Orange Box era, and Stardew Valley). No F2P for me in this tier.

      Silver: I paid for 1 game (Cities:Skylines). Again, no F2P here.

      Bronze: I paid for 4 games (Terraria, Starbound, Factorio, L4D2) and 1 piece of hardware (Steam Controller). I also own FFX|X2 HD Remaster on PS3, so that kinda counts.

      Of these, I bought only Stardew Valley and Factorio during 2016 (also, the controller). I purchased Rocket League during 2015's holiday sale, so that almost made it.

      Notice the lack of so-called "AAA" titles in my purchases. Only a couple of the Valve games would qualify, and Valve doesn't care. Maybe Cities:Skylines would count, but it's no SimCity (thank god). Also note how I bought exactly zero "realistic" shooter games. Again, Planetside 2, while "old" and "janky" and "terrible" and "broken", gets the job done for free, and lets me reward DGC if I feel like it. And I feel like I have to mention that I'd buy any Unreal game that came out (I already have all of the existing ones, and multiple copies of some of them). I was always a huge fan of those and played the hell out of them. And lastly, take note of the number of games I purchased that were a sequel to something, and note the exact nature of the sequels I did deem worthy of purchase. TF2 is a massive upgrade to the original, and L4D2 is what the original should have been patched to be.

      Yes, this is just one anecdote/datum. No, it's not meaningful by itself unless you consider that it represents a blind-spot in your outlook on the business you're in And worse, it sounds like you're being willfully ignorant about that blind-spot. Don't do that, or someone will come along and put you out of business.

    3. Re:Interesting how many aren't 2016 games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dev from the Platnium level of games

      Message to "game developer": You're a lying sack of shit.

    4. Re:Interesting how many aren't 2016 games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kudos for Factorio great game, broke my addition to Minecraft

    5. Re:Interesting how many aren't 2016 games by icsx · · Score: 1

      More interesting is the fact that Team Fortress 2 was released 2007.

  19. Too late to release Half Life 3 in 2016, I guess by sandbagger · · Score: 1

    What, is the voice actor for Gordon Freeman busy or something?

    --
    ---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
  20. Re:No Man's Sky by LesFerg · · Score: 2

    But its a fantastic study of how long your perseverance can push past your dwindling curiosity.

    I particularly like the non-repetitive realism:
    You are on a very cold planet and will shortly die, unless you get under some overhanging earth and into the shade, where the planet is *less* cold.
    You are on a very radioactive planet and will shortly die, unless you get under ground, where the planet is *less* radioactive.
    I haven't got to my 3rd planet yet, but I expect it will be a very hot planet, where you will shortly die, unless you get underground, where the planet is *less* hot.

    And why are there "sentinels" flying around getting pissed at you for mining? Presumably the player is trespassing on pre-claimed land and stealing the mineral resources of another race. So they are promoting theft as adventure?

    I should stop over-analyzing this.

    --
    If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
  21. Re: Have a SHITTY 2017, libtard freaks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AND JUST so you libtard freaks know. I have it on good authority that Trump will be lowering the age of consent!! Vodka, Redbull, Meth and my child bride will make America Greater than Ever!

  22. Re:Too late to release Half Life 3 in 2016, I gues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go back to reddit

  23. Re:No Man's Sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And why are there "sentinels" flying around getting pissed at you for mining? Presumably the player is trespassing on pre-claimed land and stealing the mineral resources of another race. So they are promoting theft as adventure?

    No, the sentinels are pissed at you for mining because they're a kind of anti-technology enforcement agency. They're there to make sure the races in the galaxy (and you) don't get too competent/capable/technologically advanced. A sort of evolutionary impediment.

    So they're promoting technological luddism as adventure.

    Yes, this is actually the backstory for them in game.

  24. Re:No Man's Sky by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

    I find it particularly confusing how a game rated "Mostly Negative" still had the highest sales revenue.

    Maybe it is because a significant portion of owners have not played the game yet. There are a lot of gamers who buy more games than they can play (especially indie titles). If you already have a large backlog of games and then you hear reports that the game hasn't delivered on all the features they claimed it would have, then it isn't a problem to put it on your backlog and wait for future patches to improve the gameplay wasting time on a half-finished game.

    Now if you don't mind, I must go and try this Half Life 2 that they came out with. I hear that it's going to be the next big thing!

  25. Personal Perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Of the games listed, I don't own any of the Platinum, Gold, or Silver. Of the Bronze group, I own very few games.of the games (5 of them, although one is on Origin not Steam).--and I own 1097 games. Most of this is because almost all games I buy I obtain in bundles or through trades. The bigger reason is that very few of the listed games are ones I'm interested in. In honesty, probably three-quarters of those 1097 games are ones I'm not really interested in but before I started trying to gift/trade away games.

    Even so, I'm only interested in a meaningful way in some of the Bronze games and none of the Platinum/Gold/Silver games. Some of this, no doubt, is due to their price* or because I have a marginally comparable game in my own library of games. The biggest reason though is simply way too many are focused on either open world, crafting, or online play. The first too get old very quickly and online play has long ago lost its major draw for me**. I would say I am pleasantly surprised with the large number of metroidvanias, shooters, and generally good platforms (2d or 3d). Still, it's sort of depressing to see the list and know that they're the sort of games most enjoyed by people.

    * It's not that I don't have the money. It's that it's hard to justify buying a $30 game (which is at a ~50% discount) when even a bundle like Yogscast which included a lot of games there were worthless to me gave me a better value ratio (even without trades). At this point, buying a $30 game makes me think I either (1) have to play a lot of it to try to justify the cost to myself or (2) try to justify the cost towards others (even though no one asks) because it seems ludicrous given you can get a good bundle of games for $3 worth a lot more than a $30 game. Of course, there's also a lot of crap bundles. But I'd even still contend you'd be better off buying 10 bundles straight from Indiegala or Bundlestars at $3 (or however many to add up to $30 for bundles that don't go over $4) than that one $30 game. Which makes me wonder if that's what's messing up the stats.

    ** FPSs were fun but you need really low latency. And now that we've got tons of people who make those games nearly a life of theirs, it's better to just avoid them if you want to have any serious fun--or you want to become a master of the game. MMOs? Not worth the money. Most other 4x/strategy/whatever? I'd probably rather play against a computer, honestly, or in a single player campaign. In the end, though, it'd still probably not be worth it.to invest the time. That last part is probably the biggest refrain that refrains me from choosing much other than games I can just quickly play and resume later. Or for which playthroughs are short enough I can do a run and improve and play again.

    1. Re:Personal Perspective by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      Similarly, out of the 367 games that I own, there is one Platinum level game (Rocket League) and four Bronze, plus two Bronze level games on my Wishlist.

  26. Re:Too late to release Half Life 3 in 2016, I gues by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

    The writer of Half-Life retired over 2 years ago.

  27. Re:No Man's Sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's because Steam's refund policy is poorly suited for sandbox-type games and particularly NMS. Steam's policy is refunds are available if you have fewer than 2 hours of gameplay. More than that you can sometimes get them to refund it, but the longer you've played the less likely they are to refund it. It's easy to tell a game like an FPS stinks in an hour, but by design in a survival/sandbox game it takes a good bit of time to get your feet under you and get to exploring the wider world outside your starting area.

    Most NMS players will burn through Steam's refund period just getting their ship repaired and getting off the starter planet. It takes you about an hour of poking around to explore a solar system, so by the time you were able to see there was no content beyond gathering resources just so you can keep repeating the same five or six interactions at different locations you were about 10-20 hours in and Steam wouldn't refund it.

  28. Re:No Man's Sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thats because that list is probably invented, its a list on their own store site, with a nice button to BUY the game

    i mean, its pretty obvious what it is

    also, people that got ripped off deserve it. If you are a gamer you should have an IDEA of whats possible and whats bullshit. You will not find a car guy that buys a car on the promise it can go 500 km/h and travel thru time to marty mcfly 60s imaginary town.

  29. Path of Exile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to say it's great seeing a F2P game done right, like Path of Exile, hit the top 100 revenue earner on Steam. Great game by the way for you Diablo lovers.

    1. Re:Path of Exile by Anonymous_Coward_No1 · · Score: 1

      Worth noting that it is a STEAM top earner where the vast majority of spending in the game doesn't involve Steam.

  30. Re: Have a SHITTY 2017, libtard freaks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never mind that, I suck goat cock.

  31. Re:No Man's Sky by kuzb · · Score: 1

    You're looking at the wrong number. You should be looking at the vote totals. Since you have to pay in order to leave a rating this makes perfect sense.

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  32. Re:No Man's Sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Others are still clinging on hoping the devs will fix the mess and release the game they showed the world during E3 and whatnot.

    I think the only reason they are patching game is because of a pending class action lawsuit I hear about. Strong bullshit argument helps. As far as game goes, it is not actualy too bad. Pirated 1.3 version. It was ok. Good times while high. But it gets boring fast and is nothing like what is advertised.

    They had the balls to keep the original trailer even after shit storm. What a bunch of assholes. But in the end I don't think game can be fixed. Another excellent example is X:Rebirth. I saw that one coming.

  33. Re:Too late to release Half Life 3 in 2016, I gues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is Half Life 3 the new Duke Nukem Forever?

  34. Re:Too late to release Half Life 3 in 2016, I gues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Valve invented the roller-coaster scripted FPS, so they had a huge first mover advantage. Today? There's been a Call of Duty every year, whatever other games I don't care about to be aware of them or remember them, and similar follow-the-yellow-line third person games like Uncharted. Importantly, they're big budget Hollywood-like shit, that most people can't play on their PC.
    Valve does games that play on laptops and consumer PCs. If they make a high budget Half-Life 3, it will be an incentive for their customers to go buy an Xbox or PS4 to play it, or to buy it on one of these. This doesn't draw customer to the Steam store. If they make it high budget, Steam only, it might struggle to have enough sales to recoup the costs, or people will be dissatisfied seeing it run at 15fps on their laptop?
    If they make it friendly to lowly hardware, it can be quite a success. But it will be ridiculed by all the elitist snobs with their i5s and i7s and big vid cards. Even though games haven't changed since 2004 except for bumping up the specs and showing more triangles and pixels (my opinion)
    Fuck it, the last then-recent game I remember running on my PC was Left 4 Dead. I since gave up on almost all games. I refuse to spend $1000 on upgrades, or just to buy the right $150 card to play games on linux, poorly. Just as with all those people refusing to buy a $400-$500 tablet.

  35. Re:No Man's Sky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or you could just analyse competently. The sun is hot and a radiation source, going underground will block it. Underground is often warmer than the cold air, though a little bit of rock over your head wont really make the slightest difference, a cave might.

  36. Re:No Man's Sky by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

    Steam accepted refunds for weeks after purchase for this particular game, simply because the backlash was so huge. The lack of the expected revenue loss was NOT because people couldn't refund it.

    The truth of the matter is, while it didn't deserve the absurd fan generated hype by any means, it wasn't that bad. Not great, not bad, just meh. A small, though larger than normal, portion of the gaming population were extremely upset over this, but for most people it's not that different than any other game, and isn't enough to get a refund over..

    --
    Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  37. PS4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this based on reviews and votes, not purchases? Look on PSN and the game has over 130,000 thumbs up, compare that to Dark Souls 3 which has about 70,000

  38. Re:No Man's Sky by LesFerg · · Score: 1

    I wasn't talking about the reason, just the repetition.
    Next I landed on a "toxic" planet. I would die if I stayed on the surface. Underground it was less "toxic". You don't think the pattern is a little over used?

    --
    If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.